26
Neutron Background Simulation: Infrastructure and Validation Vadim Khotilovich, Rick Wilkinson, with help from Piet Verwilligen, Alexei Safonov, Tim Cox Simulation Meeting August 30, 2010

Neutron Background Simulation: Infrastructure and Validation

  • Upload
    milt

  • View
    33

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

Neutron Background Simulation: Infrastructure and Validation. Vadim Khotilovich, Rick Wilkinson, with help from Piet Verwilligen, Alexei Safonov, Tim Cox. Simulation Meeting August 30, 2010. Outline. Intro N eutron simulation infrastructure Basic S im H it level results for muon systems - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Citation preview

Page 1: Neutron Background Simulation:  Infrastructure and Validation

Neutron Background Simulation: Infrastructure and Validation

Vadim Khotilovich, Rick Wilkinson, with help from

Piet Verwilligen, Alexei Safonov, Tim Cox

Simulation MeetingAugust 30, 2010

Page 2: Neutron Background Simulation:  Infrastructure and Validation

Outline• Intro• Neutron simulation infrastructure• Basic SimHit level results for muon systems

– From high-stat samples produced in 3_6_3 QGSP_BERT_HP physics list

– Comparison to older results– Plans

• Validation of QGSP_BERT_HP_EML and QGSP_BERT_EMLSN physics lists– low stat samples in 3_9_0_pre2

2

Page 3: Neutron Background Simulation:  Infrastructure and Validation

Intro

• Long-lived neutrons created, diffuse around collision hall

• They get captured by nuclei, emitting a photon

• Compton scattering or photoelectric effect makes MeV electrons, which cause hits in muon chambers

From Rick’s previous presentation:http://indico.cern.ch/conferenceDisplay.py?confId=55712

Page 4: Neutron Background Simulation:  Infrastructure and Validation

Why neutrons are hard to simulate?

• Because neutrons can live up to a second before making a signal

• They can’t be treated like ordinary minimum-bias pileup, because millions of collisions in the past can contribute

• log10TOF vs log10Ekin– Plot made in 2001

From Rick’s previous presentation:http://indico.cern.ch/conferenceDisplay.py?confId=55712

Page 5: Neutron Background Simulation:  Infrastructure and Validation

5

New Neutron Simulation Infrastructuregenerator

“Pythia6GeneratorFilter”generatorNeutrons

“Pythia6GeneratorFilter”

g4SimHits“OscarProducer”

g4SimHitsNeutrons“OscarProducer”

cscNeutronWriter“CSCNeutronWriter”

rpcNeutronWriter“RPCNeutronWriter”

dtNeutronWriter“DTNeutronWriter”

g4SimHits“NeutronHitsCollector”

generator“EmptyHepMCProducer”

mix“MixingModule”

generatorAny desired generator

g4SimHits“OscarProducer”

signal

MinBiasPileup

Sample

NeutronPileup

Sampleto digitizers

NPU

f*NPU

f = fraction of filled BXs in LHC orbit

MinBias simulated with:- special physics list- tracking time up to 1s- no pt and neutron cuts

Transform TOFs of >250ns SimHits into25ns wide time intervalwhile preservinghits’ time ordering

Special utility modulesto standardize collectionsfor MixingModule S

imM

uo

n/N

eu

tron

Page 6: Neutron Background Simulation:  Infrastructure and Validation

Neutron SIM Samples• CMSSW_3_6_3• QGSP_BERT_HP physics list• MinBias generated @ 14 TeV• ~105K events• Geometries

– Current detector geometry– Most of results: TDR RPC & YE4 shielding

• Along with transformed neutron SimHit collections keep the original ones produced by GEANT

Page 7: Neutron Background Simulation:  Infrastructure and Validation

Muon SimHits TOF vs. Ekin

• TDR geometry with YE4

• CSC&DT have lots of low energy hits– RPCs are

not so sensitive

Page 8: Neutron Background Simulation:  Infrastructure and Validation

CSC: hits vs. clusters of hits• Simple clustering of CSC hits in a

chamber layer:1. Sort by closes wire group, strip, TOF2. Take first hit3. Cluster other hits around it requiring

WG ≤ 1 & S ≤ 3 & TOF < 2 ns4. Repeat recursively…

• Very low energy hits are from secondary interactions

Page 9: Neutron Background Simulation:  Infrastructure and Validation

• Fraction of events with neutron simhits– Can be used for probabilistic

interpretations

• Comparing two geometries:– Current– TDR with YE4

• ME4/2 gets ~4.4 times more neutron hits without YE4 shielding– There is smaller effect in

other ring=2 stations– Should expect similar

magnitude effect in RPC’s RE4/2 & RE4/3

9

Fractions of evt. with n-hits: YE4 effect

Geometry:currentTDR with YE4

Page 10: Neutron Background Simulation:  Infrastructure and Validation

• SimHits from regular minbias vs. SimHits from neutrons

• TDR geometry with YE4

• CSC:– Most stations get hits from

neutrons more often then from MinBias (except ME1/1)

– Even with shielding ME4/2 is dominated by neutron hits

• RPCf:– MinBias contribution is higher in

most of stations (except RE 4/3, 4/2, 3/3)

• b/c neutron hits energies are lower

10

Fractions of evt. with hits: MB vs. neutrons

SimHits from:MinBiasNeutrons

SimHits from:MinBiasNeutrons

Page 11: Neutron Background Simulation:  Infrastructure and Validation

•T

DR

geo

met

ry w

ith Y

E4

11

Fractions of events with neutron hits

Page 12: Neutron Background Simulation:  Infrastructure and Validation

• TDR geometry with YE4

• NPU=25

• Fraction of filled BXs = 0.795

• Only neutron bars have text markers

• DT&CSC n-cluster fluxes ~2 times lower then n-hits fluxes 12

Neutron Hits Fluxes at Nominal LSimHits from:MinBiasNeutrons

SimHits from:MinBiasNeutrons

SimHits from:MinBiasNeutrons

SimHits from:MinBiasNeutrons

Page 13: Neutron Background Simulation:  Infrastructure and Validation

• CMS Trigger TDR results:– Full circles = Neutron hits– Solid lines + open circles =

MinBias

• Current estimates for neutron rates are– ~2-6 times lower in CSC– ~4-30 times lower in DT– Reason not clear

• Current estimates for MinBias rates are– CSC

• Somewhat higher, especially for closer to beamline stations

– DT• Reasonably similar• Slightly higher in outer stations

• Plan to produce somewhat similar plot for easier comparison 13

Neutron Hits Fluxes: Trigger TDR

Page 14: Neutron Background Simulation:  Infrastructure and Validation

• Neutron simulation infrastructure:– Extending the configuration for heavy ion simulation

• With help from Catherine Silvestre– Consolidation of all relevant modules in SimMuon/Neutron– Maybe adding an option to cmsDriver– Adopting new physics lists– Possibly: employ endcaps’ rotational and +-z symmetry to effectively increase

neutron samples statistics x34 for trigger rates studies• Plans for studies:

– Comparison to data• Special runs with 1-layer CSC pretrigger are planned to be taken soon• Will need 7 TeV neutron sample simulated

– DIGI level• Preliminary: fraction of events with CSC digis from neutrons is ~5 times lower than

fraction of events with neutron simhits– Trigger primitives level

• Preliminary: – Without YE4, ME4/2 gets ~40% more of LCTs b/c of neutrons – Much lower effect in other chamber types

– GMT• Combining CSC and RPCf in high pileup environment

14

Plans

Page 15: Neutron Background Simulation:  Infrastructure and Validation

Physics Lists Validation

15

Page 16: Neutron Background Simulation:  Infrastructure and Validation

• Standard one for use in CMS simulation:– QGSP_BERT_EML

• Too crude for neutron modelling

• Special “high precision” lists for modeling of long-lived neutrons:– QGSP_BERT_HP

• Older detailed multiple scattering model– QGSP_BERT_HP_EML

• New simplified/faster multiple scattering model

• Special parameterized neutron cross section table:– QGSP_BERT_EMLSN

• The newest parameterization

16

Physics Lists

Page 17: Neutron Background Simulation:  Infrastructure and Validation

• For each physics list:– 2K events sample– Produced with CMSSW_3_9_0_pre2 in the same conditions– Standard geometry– GEANT settings:

g4SimHitsNeutrons.Physics.type = 'SimG4Core/Physics/QGSP_BERT_***‘g4SimHitsNeutrons.Physics.FlagBERT = Trueg4SimHitsNeutrons.StackingAction.NeutronThreshold = 0.g4SimHitsNeutrons.StackingAction.MaxTrackTime = 1e9g4SimHitsNeutrons.SteppingAction.MaxTrackTime = 1e9# the following two enable simulation in the Quad regiong4SimHitsNeutrons.StackingAction.MaxTrackTimes[2] = 1e9g4SimHitsNeutrons.SteppingAction.MaxTrackTimes[2] = 1e9# no cuts on generator-level particlesg4SimHitsNeutrons.Generator.ApplyPCuts = Falseg4SimHitsNeutrons.Generator.ApplyEtaCuts = False

17

Validation Samples

Page 18: Neutron Background Simulation:  Infrastructure and Validation

QGSP_BERT_HP 17.2QGSP_BERT_HP_EML 16.2QGSP_BERT_EMLSN 1.4QGSP_BERT_EML 1.2

• For HP lists Most of time is spent in transport of neutrons from quad regions

• EMLSN timing: too good to be true?...

18

Timing (min/evt)

Page 19: Neutron Background Simulation:  Infrastructure and Validation

• ~x4 lower for EMLSN

• HP and HP_EML: within stat errors– Except ME4/2 where

quad region simulationis important

• DT & RPC:– Small statistics– x2-5 lower for EMLSN

in DT

19

Fraction of Events with n-hits in CSC

Page 20: Neutron Background Simulation:  Infrastructure and Validation

• _

20

Validation: TOF vs. Ekin in CSCQGSP_BERT_HP QGSP_BERT_HP_EML

QGSP_BERT_EMLSN QGSP_BERT_EML

Both exhibitTOF cut-offat 104 ns

Page 21: Neutron Background Simulation:  Infrastructure and Validation

• P

21

Validation: Ekin & TOF in CSC

Page 22: Neutron Background Simulation:  Infrastructure and Validation

Conclusions• QGSP_BERT_HP and QGSP_BERT_HP_EML show close

results, except for ME4/2 station• QGSP_BERT_EMLSN

– Neutron hit yield lower by x4– It doesn’t track particles longer then 104 ns

2222

Page 23: Neutron Background Simulation:  Infrastructure and Validation

BACKUP

23

Page 24: Neutron Background Simulation:  Infrastructure and Validation

• Neutrons leave hits in 1-2 layers most of time

• By chamber type (no YE4 schielding):

24

CSC # of layers with hitsMinBias

Neutrons

Page 25: Neutron Background Simulation:  Infrastructure and Validation

25

r-z Neutron hits Heatmap

Endcap in currentgeometry

TDR geometry with YE4

Page 26: Neutron Background Simulation:  Infrastructure and Validation

26

x-y Neutron hits Heatmap in Barrel